It is not really "losing a pawn in the opening"1:14, 1. it is the apawn, and Black gets 2 Bs, and White has no advantage despite his extra pawn. g3? 3:40 is a horrible move by Gelfand creating white square weaknesses on the Kside, and an instructive moment is f5!? 5:44 this move is not the best way to attack the king, Ng5 with the idea of Qf6 and h4 is much stronger, White misses his chance to equalize at 7:44 with Bf1? he had to play Bxe4 and f3!, White's f3 at 9:02 is simply wrong and Black's attack is winning, then at 11:08 a huge error Rg5? is wrong, Rbh8 would have been crushing...White manages to bring it back to equal but then panics and loses, an interesting, fun blitz game, worth studying www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1913694
Trader19 it proves a point. In blitz it s much more difficult to accurately defend the king and often winning pawn can be compensate with an attack on the king. But never study or analyse blitz , it s simply a loss of time. Because it s full of blunder.
